Greetings from your friendly, neighborhood, TERRORIST!

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...


C J Campbell wrote:

BTW, has Kerry said he would lift even one single security
restriction put
in place by the Bush administration, or is he still saying that Bush
has not
gone far enough?

He is quoted by AOPA as telling them "Increased domestic security is
now a fact of
life, but I think that the government has a responsibility to see that
the effect on
businesses and individuals is minimized."

You have to just LOVE these ambigious statements from politicians that
say nothing....achieve nothing....and insult your intelligence if you
let the statement go unchallanged :-)
"Tell us Mr. Politician, how MUCH increase....and increased over what
base value? And define "minimized" please Mr. Politician.......minimized
to what level........against what base value? Exactly how much domestic
security is in place now over what was there before, and how effective
is that security? Define the exact effects on businesses please?

The plain simple fact that people seem to either ignore or forget when
getting all fired up about national security issues and who's "right's"
will be trampled on is the fact that in a totally free society, there is
no such thing as national security. It's impossible by
definition...period!
Any viable action taken by a government authority that even remotely
begins to address a WORKABLE scenario in a national security context
will mean that government control will replace individual "rights".
It's the classic "you can't have it both ways" thing. You either have
total freedom or you have national security.
Right now in the United States, what we have are politicians desperately
caught between a public they are sworn to defend and who are screaming
at them 24 hours a day to take action that will protect them, and the
same public screaming at them 24 hours a day that the actions they
absolutely must take to even begin to address the national security
issues are violating their individual rights.
The result has been the Patriot Act good or bad, wide open borders, an
attempt at airport security that seems to hassle old ladies more than it
guarantees the capture of terrorists, and a whole gaggle of people on
these newsgroups who, just like the rest of the country, don't
understand that national security and individual rights can't exist on
the same page at the same point in time in a free society.
Argue on for all the good it will do :-)
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Flight Instructor/Aerobatics/Retired

"C Kingsbury" wrote in message
ink.net...
Well, I guess I made the list of suspected terrorists, this weekend.

Guess I get to be the lone voice of dissent here.

In case you haven't noticed, there's at least a couple ten thousand
loonies
out there who want to kill us in large numbers. Maybe that's GWB's fault,
maybe it isn't, but that doesn't change the situation on the ground *right
now.* You're hanging around off the edge of a runway next near an ANG
base.
Sorry, but I can see where the guys are going to get a little edgy.

So what? Why should we care if he's edgy? Personally, I'd rather my law
enforcement (military or civilian) be a little less jumpy, but if they are,
the solution is not for me (or the original poster) to comply with their
illegitimate requests. Rather, the solution is to fire the jumpy law
enforcement officers and hire ones that have more common sense.

Sounds
like the soldier was a little gruffer with you than he needed to be, but
that's not his first order of business.

The soldier had no business running the original poster off, unless he was
on military property (it's not clear whether he was or not). Off military
property, the soldier has no authority whatsoever to force someone to leave.
For that matter, even civilian law enforcement would not have that
authority.

A military or civilian law enforcement officer certainly is within their
rights to approach a person they find suspicious and talk to them. If they
ascertain that there is genuine cause for concern, they have legitimate
steps they can take. But that would not have been the case here, and the
officer's only legitimate action at that point would have been to wish the
"suspect" a nice day and get on to doing his job elsewhere.

And yes, I do know that of which I speak. I was grounded for three months
after 9/11 because of the massive BOS-NYC-DC TFRs that no one cared to
explain.

TFRs that were not reasonable, that were not justified, and should have been
criticized loudly. Inasmuch as you sit around claiming that they *were*
reasonable, you deserved to be grounded.

If we get hit again at home, and with the election right around the corner
there's plenty of reason to be on guard, we might lose everything.

Everything? That seems a little extreme. How, exactly, do you suggest that
we'd lose literally everything? Near as I can tell, we'd lose very little.
Our government is reasonably well protected from problems even when the "top
brass" is killed. Frankly, while I can't stand to think of anyone being
killed, sometimes I think we could benefit from losing the entire top
echelon of government so we could start over. I certainly don't believe
we'd lose everything, or even close to everything.

How about
a DC-style ADIZ over every single Class B? Mandatory flight plans for
everything? FAA can't handle it, tough ****, they'll just have a lottery
for
VFR departure slots on weekends. What makes you think your non-pilot
neighbors won't surrender your freedom to fly without a second thought?

Of course they will. That's why it's so atrocious that the non-pilot
military guard is illegally harassing a perfectly innocent person. It's
just one more step in the wrong direction.

Don't get me wrong- I think the TSA is a mess and the current airline
security system, which is still the tagrte we need to worry the most
about,
is a sickening morass of bureaucratic incompetence. So at best you've got
a
marginal case to make that the ANG guy who harassed you should have been
at
BDL searching peoples' carry-ons instead, or at the container terminal in
Boston. That's about it.

That's about what? The case is excellent for arguing that the military
guard should have let him stay where he was, watching the planes for as long
as he wanted to.

Pete

(Paul Tomblin) wrote in
:

In a previous article, Nomen Nescio
] said:
Well, I guess I made the list of suspected terrorists, this weekend.

At least you didn't commit the "crime" of photographing a bridge while
black. See http://69.93.170.43/




that guy is a nut-ball. he is on the far left frindge of radical
socialists... look at his website...

http://www.brownequalsterrorist.com/

In a previous article, FullName said:
(Paul Tomblin) wrote in
:
At least you didn't commit the "crime" of photographing a bridge while
black. See http://69.93.170.43/

that guy is a nut-ball. he is on the far left frindge of radical
socialists... look at his website...
http://www.brownequalsterrorist.com/

Funny, I thought this country had a constitution protecting your right to
freedom of speech, and freedom from unreasonable search and seizure. I
guess I was wrong.

Being "on the far left frindge(sic) of radical socialists" is not grounds
for being threatened by multiple police just because you took a picture of
a public structure.

--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
"You must be smarter than this stick ---- to put a machine on the
Internet."

Nomen Nescio ] wrote in
:


Shame people cant have more respect for people that have voulnteered to
fight for our freedoms.

I dont speak to the particulars of this troopers actions but to yours
and your blatent disrespect for him. just because he dosent give a sh*t
about how many log entries you have in your book doesnt mean he dosent
have a job to do.

Maybe we should have him go back to doing the same job he had on sept
10th 2001, sittin at the desk ...I perfer he KEEP doing what he did.



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Well, I guess I made the list of suspected terrorists, this weekend.
My wife and I had been hiking in the hills at the foot of the
Berkshires and and when we got back to the car we decided to stop at
Barnes Airport (KBAF) and hang out watching the planes, for a while,
and cool off after the hike. So we parked on the side of the road next
to rnwy 20, sat on the tailgate and sipped on a soda as the planes
came and went, as we have done intermittently for over 3 decades.
After 1/2 hour, a camo Hummer pulled out of the Air National Guard
base (on the other side of the airport) and came toward us. It pulled
up to the fence next to us. G.I. Joe sat there for a minute doing
whatever (chambering a round in his 9mm?), then got out and informed
us that "You can't stay there!". "We're just having a soda and
watching the planes", I said. He repeated "You can't stay there!".
"I've been coming to this spot for over 30 years, damn, 9/11's got you
guys pretty edgy, huh. I'm a pilot and I've flown in here more times
than I can count". "You have to leave, NOW, sir!", he replied sternly.
"Is there any place, around here, where it's OK to sit and watch the
planes?", my wife asked. "Not here.......there's a place to watch the
planes at Bradley" (KBDL....20 miles away, I know the place off rnwy
6......perfect spot to lob a Stinger Missile up the ass of a 747 on
takeoff), "but you can't stay here". Realizing the futility of further
discussion, I said, "OK, we're outta here". I closed up the tailgate
of the Tahoe and he went back to his Hummer. My wife and I climbed in,
and we started driving off. A 1/2 mile down the road my wife says,
"You know, he was taking pictures of you as you were closing the
tailgate". "Oh, ****"
So, now, Folks, .....somewhere in Washington, in some little file,
there are probably twenty seven 8x10 color glossy pictures with
circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one explaining
what each one was, to be used as evidence against me.
The next airline trip should be fun......can you say "Cavity Search"!

Hoping you all stay out of the database.

Later,
Osama Bin Buttf**ked

"FullName" wrote in message
...
that guy is a nut-ball. he is on the far left frindge of radical
socialists... look at his website...

http://www.brownequalsterrorist.com/

I looked. Where's the "far left frindge [sic] of radical socialists"
content? All I could find were legitimate concerns regarding the rampant
loss of civil rights in this country.

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...

"Steve Foley" wrote in message
...
What authority is needed to take pictures?

There are privacy laws in most states prohibiting people taking pictures
of
you if you don't want them taken, especially if the pictures are being
taken
as a form of intimidation or some other threat such as embarrassment. I
don't know about Massachusetts but across the state line in New York the
privacy laws are very strict indeed.

The law in New York (or anywhere else in the US) prohibits photographing an
unwilling subject in public? That doesn't sound credible. Could you cite the
statute please, or some other source of information concerning it?

--Gary

Doug ) wrote:

Shame people cant have more respect for people that have voulnteered to
fight for our freedoms.
snip

It seems to me that someone, somewhere in the chain of command was
fighting against our freedoms in this particular case.

--
Peter

"Doug" wrote in message
...
Shame people cant have more respect for people that have voulnteered to
fight for our freedoms.

Respect does not mean blindly obeying. With that respect comes an
expecation that our trust in those people won't be abused. As soon as it is
abused, the respect is no longer deserved.

I dont speak to the particulars of this troopers actions but to yours
and your blatent disrespect for him. just because he dosent give a sh*t
about how many log entries you have in your book doesnt mean he dosent
have a job to do.

He does have a job to do. That job doesn't involve running off people who
are behaving in a perfectly legal manner.

Maybe we should have him go back to doing the same job he had on sept
10th 2001, sittin at the desk ...I perfer he KEEP doing what he did.

Why? How is what he's doing helping anyone? Maybe you'd prefer that we
simply send a law enforcement team to every residence in the US, searching
for evidence of terrorist activities? That would be the most reliable way
of making us safe, after all, right?

Pete

that guy is a nut-ball. he is on the far left frindge of radical
socialists... look at his website...

http://www.brownequalsterrorist.com/

I looked. Where's the "far left frindge [sic] of radical socialists"
content? All I could find were legitimate concerns regarding the
rampant loss of civil rights in this country.

I'd like to know where you got this too!